A comprehensive review of current status of infection prevention and control program in low- and middle-income countries.

Saima Asghar, Muhammad Atif, Imran Masood, Madiha Khan
{"title":"A comprehensive review of current status of infection prevention and control program in low- and middle-income countries.","authors":"Saima Asghar, Muhammad Atif, Imran Masood, Madiha Khan","doi":"10.1016/j.idh.2025.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aims to underscore the adoption and implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) practices based on the World Health Organization's Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).</p><p><strong>Methods and design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Guiding methodology: </strong>Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, grey literature and reference lists of studies published between January 2018 and September 2024.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria to recruit studies: </strong>Peer reviewed full length, cross-sectional, mixed method and quasi-experimental studies written in English, conducted in LMICs and used IPCAF as assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Data were extracted on a data extraction form and quality of studies was evaluated by using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields. Evidence was generated as a group of themes.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>In total, 24 studies were selected based on eligibility criteria. IPC program was implemented to a varying degree in healthcare facilities (HCFs) of LMICs. Key barriers reported were; no allocation of budget for IPC, insufficient staffing of full-time IPC professionals, absence of clear IPC goals, challenges in staff training, lack of resources, no periodic monitoring and inconsistent availability of IPC supplies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was an evidence on implementation of IPC program in the HCFs of LMICs, however, LMICs faced substantial challenges in achieving consistent and effective IPC.</p>","PeriodicalId":94040,"journal":{"name":"Infection, disease & health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection, disease & health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idh.2025.03.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review aims to underscore the adoption and implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) practices based on the World Health Organization's Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods and design: Systematic review.

Guiding methodology: Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Data sources: PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, grey literature and reference lists of studies published between January 2018 and September 2024.

Eligibility criteria to recruit studies: Peer reviewed full length, cross-sectional, mixed method and quasi-experimental studies written in English, conducted in LMICs and used IPCAF as assessment tool.

Data extraction and synthesis: Data were extracted on a data extraction form and quality of studies was evaluated by using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields. Evidence was generated as a group of themes.

Findings: In total, 24 studies were selected based on eligibility criteria. IPC program was implemented to a varying degree in healthcare facilities (HCFs) of LMICs. Key barriers reported were; no allocation of budget for IPC, insufficient staffing of full-time IPC professionals, absence of clear IPC goals, challenges in staff training, lack of resources, no periodic monitoring and inconsistent availability of IPC supplies.

Conclusions: There was an evidence on implementation of IPC program in the HCFs of LMICs, however, LMICs faced substantial challenges in achieving consistent and effective IPC.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信